Going slightly off topic, I don't know how common this is but I'm aware of telephone SOP having changed. Until maybe 20 years ago, the standard sentence from pretty well anybody (in the UK - I can't speak for elsewhere) wasn't to identify oneself, but to identify the phone number. As a child, I picked up the phone and said '654321?' with a decided questioning tone. If one lived in a city this was enough; people in smaller towns that shared exchanges said 'Smalltown 654321'. (It would be the same code as LocalVillage and SmallHamlet, but one gave the name rather than the code '0987 654321?' Too many numbers, I suppose.) That established that the caller had called the correct number; after that we would enter into the negotiation of who precisely the caller wanted to speak to because it was one number per household, and I don't recall there being anything particular about whether the caller would say 'this is Caller, may I speak to Hippy Chick?' or 'may I speak to Hippy Chick? This is caller'. I think the split between answering just with the number, and answering '654321, this is Hippy Chick' was fairly even and tended to depend on other factors, such as the tendency for callers to assume that I was my sister.
Then we started being advised not to identify ourselves on the phone. I can remember this being advice from someone fairly official - the phone companies? - but I don't totally remember why. It might have been the start of telemarketing, but at the back of my mind I remember it being advice aimed particularly at women so it might have been to do with nuisance calls. At that point, I started answering my phone with 'Hello?' and waiting for you to tell me who you were and what you wanted. I don't actually like it, it seems abrupt, but I can't think that I would have broken the earlier habit without a definite reason.
Now, of course, when so many of us have mobile phones, it's changing again, because whan you ring the Hippy Chick landline, you might get any of the four of us; when you ring my mobile, I'm not going to identify myself because nobody shares that phone with me, so I assume that you're expecting to speak specifically to me.
I've had a clunky conversation with somebody in which each of us is failing to identify the other - a recruitment agency, where the caller wasn't going to tell me why he wanted to speak to Mr Chick, or even that he was from a recruitment agency, in case I was somebody who didn't need to know that he was looking for a new job. Equally, if the only message I had was 'John called, this number, wants you to call him back,' then while the job search was active, Mr Chick would probably guess that it was one of the agencies and call; three months later, when he had a job, he's not calling because John might be an agency, and might be trying to sell him life assurance.
So yes, in Hurricane Marathon's case, the man was rude, but I do sometimes think that phone etiquette hasn't quite kept up with changes in telecommunications.